Hutchinson County
Community Toolkit

Early Intervention and Trauma-Informed Systems

There is an undeniable correlation between adverse childhood experiences and later juvenile justice involvement. Without early detection and intervention, the consequences for children are quite severe. Young trauma survivors may experience cognitive impairment and other health risks. It is very common for youth who did not receive early intervention to exhibit problematic and sometimes criminal activity, including harmful substance misuse.

Many children demonstrate signs of traumatic stress early and throughout their childhood. Preschool aged children might have nightmares or have extreme fear of separation. Elementary school aged children might demonstrate inordinate levels of guilt and shame or have difficulty concentrating. Children might show signs of depression, eating disorders, and drug use.

It is crucial for pediatricians, teachers, counselors, and caregivers to learn to identify and address unresolved trauma in young children before it manifests in problematic behavior and other lifelong consequences. Trauma-informed systems consistently recognize that many young people and families have lived through trauma, whether as a single overwhelming event, such as witnessing or experiencing violence, or as chronic adversity repeated over time. Trauma can involve multiple types of harm, making many youths’ histories complex. At its core, trauma is the combination of exposure to overwhelming or dangerous events and the lasting stress reactions (thoughts, emotions, body responses, and behaviors) that develop as the young person tries to survive and stay safe. These reactions, such as freeze, fight, flight, or shut-down, may protect a child in the moment but can later interfere with learning, relationships, health, and safety if no one helps them understand and adjust them.

A trauma-informed approach focuses on how trauma shapes behavior and relationships, responding in ways that build safety, trust, and hope instead of adding harm. It recognizes that behaviors like “acting out,” shutting down, or using substances may, in some cases, be survival strategies rather than defiance or pathology. The goal is to help youth recognize these reactions, keep what protects them, and replace what harms them with healthier coping and connection. Being trauma-informed also includes attending to the well-being of adults, because hearing about or witnessing trauma can produce secondary traumatic stress. And when youth are involved in multiple systems -- such as schools, probation, treatment, and child welfare -- it becomes essential to coordinate care, reduce repeated questioning, and design policies and environments that minimize the risk of re-traumatization.

As the community develops its strategy, it might consider training from Educational Service Centers and pediatric associations. Parents can also learn to identify and address trauma in a patient and compassionate manner.

Intensive Care Coordination

Serious mental and emotional disorders among children represent the most complex and costly challenges to Texas communities. The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services in collaboration with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) identified the need for Intensive Care Coordination (Wraparound) services for youth and families, especially when their needs exceed what a single agency could provide. They recognized the need for a flexible and individualized approach to serving youth and families with complex challenges. Texas is an early adopter of the wraparound model of care.

To be successful, wraparound services must move beyond a single agency to include shared responsibility between organizations. The seven components of intensive care coordination include:

• Assessment and Service Planning
• Accessing and Arranging for Services
• Coordinating Multiple Services
• Access to Crisis Services
• Assisting the Child and Family in Meeting Needs
• Advocating for the Child and Family
• Monitoring Progress

Foster Early Mental Health Identification and Intervention

According to research, nearly half of all mental illness starts before age 14, yet early identification and intervention strategies remain inadequate for youth. Most frequently, the mental health challenges first present themselves as crises at the emergency room, not in schools or in mental health clinics. Failure to intervene early can have long lasting impact well into adulthood. Often youth with untreated mental health challenges self-medicate with drugs and alcohol, leading to co-occurring mental health and substance use disorders. It is imperative that communities develop early identification strategies that extend beyond emergency rooms and first responders.

While some physicians conduct early and periodic screening, diagnosis, and treatment, these are services covered only by Medicaid. A more robust strategy would involve incentivizing pediatricians and family care physicians to conduct screenings. Through the Child Psychiatry Access Network (CPAN), any pediatrician in the state can be connected with a mental health expert within 5 minutes to do a consultation on a child with concerning psychiatric symptoms. School-based screening can also be effective, making it crucial to involve school districts in communitywide efforts to identify and treat childhood mental illness early.

All these efforts are important, but they may require policy changes, whereas communities can initiate communitywide awareness efforts at any time. Parental education and resource awareness not only helps families know who and when to call for help, they also reduce stigma associated with mental illness.

Mental Health and Juvenile Justice Interagency Collaboration

While Hutchinson County is already a model of mental health and juvenile justice interagency collaboration, it is helpful to refer to best practices in this regard. For instance, a goal of interagency collaboration is to learn from each juvenile referral, through data analysis and dialogue, to develop innovative approaches to prevent future juvenile referral for at-risk youth. Some principles of effective collaboration may include:

• Commit to Formalized, Sustained, Integrated Approaches and Cross-System Collaboration Between Mental Health, Juvenile Justice, School, and Youth-Serving Organizations.
• Create a core team of multi-agency stakeholders to implement and monitor diversion efforts.
• Develop a continuum of evidence-based and trauma-informed services for youth and families outside the juvenile justice system.
• Bolster protective factors that strengthen family connections and individualized support for both youth families.
• Utilize Standardized Mental Health Screening and Assessment Tools
• Ensure that juvenile justice and mental health agencies mutually select the appropriate assessment and screening tools and provide common training on the use of these tools.
• When screening indicates a need for further evaluation, employ an individualized assessment of the needs, strengths and barriers of both the young person as well as their family.
• Ensure that none of the information collected for mental health screening and assessment jeopardizes the legal interests of the youth.
• Develop a Continuum of Evidence-Based Treatment and Practices
• View the youth’s mental health needs from the lens of responsivity; when a young person is experiencing mental health symptoms, their ability to learn and change behavior is limited. Identify and treat the mental health symptoms to improve responsiveness to interventions designed to address criminogenic needs.
• Ensure that all partners, including school staff, teachers, law enforcement, juvenile services staff, and mental health providers are all trained on how to identify mental health symptoms and signs of crisis. All partners should be trained on how to therapeutically respond and de-escalate the situation.
• Ensure that youth who are diverted from the juvenile justice system are connected with community resources in a coordinated manner. Aim for services within the least restrictive setting.
• Continually assess the capacity of local resources across the community to provide evidence-based and trauma-informed services, including mental health and substance use. Collaborate to continually expand capacity through interagency coordination and service optimization.
• Provide Specialized Training for Intake or Probation Officers
• When juvenile referral is necessary, such as when youth behavior puts them at risk of harm to themselves and others, ensure that specialized officers are extensively trained on working with youth with mental health diagnoses.
• Ensure that probation officers are experts in screening and assessments. Mental health agencies should provide continual support and training to ensure probation staff have the resources they need to effectively serve youth with mental health diagnoses.
• Work collaboratively across systems, including juvenile services, schools, and youth-serving organizations, to improve family engagement. View family engagement as the goal and responsibility of all organizations.

Establish Goals for Youth Crisis Care

For youth in need of crisis care, some of the goals to work toward may include:

• Keep youth in their home and avoid out-of-home placement as much as possible. The YES Waiver Program, which provides a highly individualized set of services that are tailored to specific youth and family needs, is a good example of wraparound care that prevents out-of-home placement.
• Integrate family and youth peer support, ensuring that caregivers are paired with Certified Family Partners and kids with youth peer support.
• Communities should also ensure that everyone who plays a role in youth crisis response, from law enforcement to mental health authorities are trained appropriately and help to design the tailored response by the community.

Co-Responder Approach

In a Co-Responder Team Model, at least one law enforcement officer and one mental health professional jointly respond to situations that likely involve a behavioral health crisis. A co-responder team can de-escalate situations and promote diversion to services. Some communities, such as Douglas County, Colorado, have created youth-specific co-responder teams with special training in responding to youth behavioral health crises. Their Youth Community Response Team partners with law enforcement, Fire/EMS, and mental health providers, and they cover all public, private, and charter schools in the areas.

Develop Comprehensive Delinquency Prevention

Strategies that are aimed at reducing the risk of juvenile referral focus on protective factors that keep kids safe, mentally healthy, and on track in school. It is important to recognize that delinquency arises when youth are exposed to a multitude of risk factors in their families and environments.

A comprehensive strategy focuses on increasing youth academic achievement and positive parental relationships. Additionally, pairing youth with mentors has been demonstrated to prevent delinquency. Years of evidence has shown that positive role models dramatically improve youth outcomes, even for youth with significant mental and emotional health issues. There is no single program that can accomplish these goals. A comprehensive prevention strategy involves multiple approaches that are tailored to individual youth. It is imperative that schools, parents, and police all recognize that prevention works best in conjunction with intentional efforts to build resilience, involve youth, and see the best in them.

Disability Awareness Training for Law Enforcement

The Arc National Center on Criminal Justice & Disability partners with law enforcement across the country to increase awareness and provide learning resources on intellectual and developmental disabilities (IDD). People with IDD often have limitations in intellectual functioning and adaptive behaviors such as social, practical, and conceptual skills. The most common diagnoses include autism, Down syndrome, Fragile X syndrome, and Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder. Not every person with a developmental disability has an intellectual disability.

Often there are no outward signs that an individual has IDD, and the officer might misinterpret behavior that is related to their diagnosis as suspicious. When confronted, people with IDD often react with fear, thus reinforcing officer suspicion. The interaction can then cascade, with the person with IDD running away from the officer, stimming (hand flapping, rocking, spinning, or repetition of words or phrases), not following commands, or not looking at the officer’s face.

Often people with IDD will not understand the officer and, out of fear, pretend to understand or quickly admit to committing a crime. Also, when the person with IDD has been the victim of a crime, their interactions with police cause them increased fear and distress, making them hesitant or unclear in describing what happened to them. For these reasons, it is imperative that law enforcement receive special training about IDD.

Some of the techniques recommended by The Arc include:

• Making a personal connection as quickly as possible. Help them feel safe. Listen to the individual’s family or caregivers for tips on how to calm them down. If a youth does run away, consider why they might be afraid.
• Recognize that stimming helps the person with IDD to calm down. Give them space before attempting to make a personal connection. Recognize that the individual may communicate in unexpected ways.
• If the individual does not immediately follow commands, make sure they understand. Wait at least 7 seconds for the information to be processed. Ask the person to repeat the direction or command in their own words. The officer can also physically demonstrate what they’d like the person to do.
• Don’t assume that a lack of eye contact is disrespect. This may be a typical response for someone with IDD.
• When there is suspicion of a law violation, ask the person to repeat back what the officer said, especially when reading their Miranda rights. Ensure that the person has an attorney or another support person to advocate for them.
• When there is suspicion that the individual with IDD is a victim of a crime, ask them what would help them feel safe. Let them know you believe them. Get them to tell their story in their own way and in their own time. Recognize that trauma will make it especially difficult for a person with IDD to communicate.

First Offender Programs

The Judicial Commission on Mental Health’s “ Texas Juvenile Mental Health and Intellectual Disabilities Law Bench Book” (2023-2025), p. 52, describes law enforcement’s statutory discretion to divert youth from juvenile justice referral and instead address law violations through First Offender Programs.

Collaboration Between Local Schools and Juvenile Detention

Collaboration between schools and juvenile services is essential to maintain educational continuity and support academic progress of youth. Some key best practices include:

• Information Sharing: Develop formal agreements to facilitate the secure and legal exchange of educational records between schools and juvenile detention.
• Coordinated Lesson Planning:
  • Align curricula inside juvenile detention with local school curricula.
  • Provide joint training session for educators from both settings to share effective teaching techniques and address the unique needs of detained youth.
• Monitoring Academic Progress
  • Create individualized education plans for students with special needs, to ensure they receive the appropriate support and accommodations in juvenile detention and in local schools.
  • Implement ongoing assessments to monitor academic progress.
• Transition Supports
  • Begin planning for the youth’s transition from detention back to school upon entry into the detention center. Involve the child’s educators, counselors, and family members.
  • Provide mentorship to youth as they transition back to school.

Ensure Presumption of Release

According to state law (Tex. Fam. Code § 54.01(e)), it is presumed that a youth will be released from detention except under certain circumstances such as:

• Risk that the child might abscond,
• Unsuitable supervision,
• Lack of a parent or caregiver to whom the court can release the child,
• A risk of harm to self or others, or
• Previous delinquent conduct.

Most of these conditions can be resolved when the child’s mental and behavioral health challenges can be addressed quickly, and the child can be safely returned home to their family or caregiver. As described previously, a comprehensive strategy does not look solely at finding an alternative placement but also addresses the comprehensive needs that keep kids at risk when returned to home following release from detention.

For instance, juvenile probation could work collaboratively with a local mental health authority or other community service provider to mobilize wraparound case management for the child and family. A county might utilize short term respite centers for youth. Alternatively, they might pair family members with a certified family partner who has similar lived experience. They might also engage inpatient or therapeutic group homes. When the focus is on bolstering protective factors for the child or family, releasing the child from detention can also decrease the likelihood of future juvenile involvement.

Family Engagement in Juvenile Court

It is imperative that families are engaged in the juvenile court process to produce positive outcomes for youth. They are the most important factors in promoting positive behavior and skill building. Promoting positive family engagement is associated with optimal mental health outcomes, school achievement, and positive peer relationships.

Most communities struggle to engage families effectively. It is not uncommon for courts and probation staff to become more directive, considering ways to require families to remain involved, which makes partnering with the family to create optimal outcomes a challenge. Sometimes courts have no clear way of promoting family engagement throughout the process.

Courts might consider shaping their family engagement strategies as follows:

• Recognize how juvenile court obligations impact the functioning of a family that already struggles with its own behavioral health and logistical challenges,
• Develop interventions based on the capacities and needs of family members who would be responsible for ensuring their child remains engaged,
• Seek out evidence-based models that divert children from detention and keep them with their families as far as possible, and
• Establishing measurable objectives regarding positive family engagement and collecting data to track outcomes.

Additionally, courts and juvenile probation offices might consider creating more formal partnerships with families of justice-involved youth. For instance, the Juvenile Probation Department of Pierce County, Washington, established a family council to assist the court and probation in shifting toward a family-centered approach. The Department of Youth Services in Massachusetts established virtual family counseling services to help families address their unique needs rather than create a single program or class that may or may not address family needs. The Department also hired a Director of Family Engagement to work with families and ensure that the court best partners with families as the experts. Montana developed a family mentoring program, pairing parents with family partners.

In Williamson County, Texas, the Juvenile Probation Department excels at parent and family engagement. In support of their goals, they have recruited community members and businesses to provide treats, experiences, and accessible events for families whose children are involved in the juvenile justice system.

These are just a few examples of successful approaches to family engagement.

Streamlined Fitness Restoration Process

According to Texas Health and Human Services, a streamlined process of fitness restoration might include:

• Continuity of care for youth found unfit to proceed,
• Regular review of fitness restoration cases across juvenile justice and local mental health authority stakeholders,
• Outpatient fitness restoration, and
• Regular trainings and education to courts on Family Code Chapter 55, which relates to proceedings concerning children with mental illness or intellectual disabilities.

The Judicial Commission on Mental Health also outlines best practices for reviewing fitness reports, which include:

• Ensure that attorneys who receive the child’s fitness report understand it and determine whether it is an accurate portrayal of the child.
• Question whether the language attributed to the child matches the lawyer’s own observations.
• Be aware of descriptions such as those listed below, which may indicate that the child is not currently fit to proceed, even if fitness reports might say otherwise:
  • “The child appears at least marginally fit to proceed at this time.”
  • “The child’s cognitive functioning is within the borderline range, but their adaptive behavioral functioning is noticeably below expectation.”
  • “The child was partially oriented to time.”
  • “The child did not know the name of the home where they were living.”
  • “The child’s communication was rated within the severely impaired range.”
• Understand that children are either fit to proceed or not, there is no “sliding scale” of fitness. It might be necessary for attorneys to object to fitness determinations that are based on a “partially fit” assessment.
• Speak to the child at least by phone prior to determining whether to object to the report, and to request additional time.

Trauma-Informed Juvenile Court Systems

According to the National Child Traumatic Stress Network, more than 80 percent of juvenile justice-involved youth report having experienced trauma with many of them having experienced multiple, chronic, and pervasive personal trauma. It is imperative that juvenile courts and staff of organizations that serve justice-involved youth receive training on trauma and to adopt trauma-informed practices to protect children.

Some of the applicable principles include:

• Creating a culture of trauma-informed care,
• Collaboration within and across systems,
• Respect for youth and family voice,
• Recognize and address the potential for secondary trauma, or the trauma that occurs when working with and serving youth with experiences of trauma, among court and probation staff,
• Providing ongoing quality training,
• Promote information sharing between entities to spark innovation and harness best practices,
• Establish a training system informed by data, and
• Ensure that training is adequately funded and sustainable.

Start Reentry Planning Upon Juvenile REferral

According to the Justice Center of the Council on State Governments, the most effective reentry planning occurs when the planning begins at intake and continues through family reintegration and aftercare. Successful outcomes require case management that begins with the end in mind: resilient children bolstered by protective factors within their families and communities. This requires the juvenile probation department to work with case managers within the community to identify the risk factors that must be addressed to achieve successful reentry. A flexible and individualized approach is most likely to achieve success.

School Transition

Justice-involved youth are at high risk of falling behind their peers, forcing them to repeat grades and increasing the likelihood they drop out of school entirely. State law (Texas Education Code § 37.023) requires that all returning students have a transition plan, but many districts are either unaware of these obligations or they lack the training and guidance to do transition planning effectively. As an additional support, the Texas Legislature passed H.B. 5195 in 2023, which added section 54.021 to the Texas Family Code to ensure that youth in detention facilities receive education and services while detained. By the 21st day of a youth’s detention, the detention facility must assess the child and develop a written plan to reach rehabilitation goals and provide a status report every 90 days.

Recommendations for improving transition planning include:

• Utilize a team-based approach to school transition, including family, school, juvenile probation, and community providers such as local mental health authorities,
• Foster efficient records transfer from juvenile detention to schools, also ensuring that education services within juvenile detention are aligned with ISD curriculum requirements,
• Develop an individualized transition plan that accounts for the unique needs and challenges of family members as well as youth,
• Stay up to date on relevant research, especially when developing individualized interventions, and
• Perform regular monitoring and tracking.

Develop a Community Approach to Juvenile Probation

Many of the best practices already mentioned in this report, including wraparound case management, family engagement, and reentry planning, all serve to improve probation outcomes. In a rural area with limited resources, juvenile probation departments may lack the internal resources and community services that might be available in larger cities. This requires courts and probation departments in smaller counties to reimagine how probation can best partner with local mental health authorities, schools, CRCGs, and other community resources to achieve best outcomes. Juvenile probation does not have to be in it alone.

For instance, when probation partners with schools to ensure youth with mental health, learning, or developmental disorders receive the proper educational supports, they can achieve better educational outcomes. As an example, Disability Rights Texas partners with the Harris County Juvenile Probation Department to assist them in advocating for special educational services and accommodations.

Juvenile probation departments in smaller areas might also consider using certified peers with relevant lived experience to work alongside youth with mental and emotional health challenges and certified family partners to work with families. Departments could also recruit mentors and other volunteers to assist with positive youth development.

Juvenile probation departments might also consider partnering with a workforce development board or other vocational resources to establish training and job preparation programs for youth on probation. The Annie E Casey Foundation provides a number of examples across the country of successful workforce/probation partnerships.

There are just a few examples of partnerships that can help smaller counties achieve optimal juvenile probation outcomes.

BEST PRACTICE: Family Engagement in Juvenile Services and Probation

Hutchinson County Juvenile Justice Department dedicates officers to family engagement and youth transition back to home and the community. As the community works toward implementing its family engagement strategy, team leaders might benefit from considering how family engagement approaches are changing. The Annie E. Casey Foundation offers strategies for shifting practices and thinking around family engagement:

• Make youth and family partnerships a key priority
• Ensure that the term “family” encompass parents as well as other family caregivers,
• Simplify language that juvenile professionals use,
• Involve youth and families in case planning,
• Look broadly at the needs of youth and families, encompassing everything from reducing transportation barriers to connecting youth with recreational activities,
• Provide ongoing training to probation staff and partners, ensuring that they are always on the leading edge of emerging best practices, and
• Engage youth and families in efforts to improve the overall juvenile system for everyone, including future clients.

BEST PRACTICE: Certified Family Partners supporting families of juvenile justice-involved youth

A consistent body of research shows that meaningful family engagement is one of the strongest predictors of positive outcomes for youth involved in the juvenile justice system. Yet studies consistently find that families often experience shame, confusion, and mistrust when navigating courts, probation, mental health services, and schools. All of these are factors that significantly reduce participation in programs, such as juvenile probation, that rely on parental involvement.

Certified Family Partners (CFPs), who combine professional training with their lived experience raising a child with behavioral health challenges, are uniquely positioned to address these barriers. Their training, expertise in navigating complex juvenile justice and mental health systems, and commitment to trauma-informed approaches equips them to provide emotional support and build confidence. Their direct support to families helps grow caregiver self-efficacy - their internal sense that they can succeed as a parent. All of these are the key conditions for improving family participation.

Preliminary studies indicate that CFPs may contribute directly to outcomes associated with reduced recidivism, improvements in child engagement with juvenile and mental health programming, and overall improved family functioning. For instance, a parent-to-parent program in King County, Washington demonstrated positive effects for parents involved in the child-welfare system. In another study, families receiving Family Partner services reported an increase in parental self-efficacy, strengthened relationships with system partners, and reduced feelings of isolation and blame.

Certified Family Partners can reinforce the core principles of evidence-based family interventions such as multi-systemic therapy (MST) by helping parents build motivation, navigate services, follow through on plans, and advocate effectively for their children. Overall, there are good reasons to think that incorporating Certified Family Partners into juvenile justice will measurably improve outcomes for both youth and their caregivers.